Critical thinking disposition self-rating form

Register for a free account

However the wax would not be strong enough.


It leaves them with a problem, how do they attach the two steel rings to make them a figure eight. In being left with the wick as a tool, and labelling it as such we become fixated on seeing the primary function of the wick as giving off light, which hinders our ability to come up with a solution for creating a figure In order to effectively solve problem we must break down our concept of the wick down further. In seeing a wick as just a waxed piece of string, we are able to get past functional fixedness and see the alternate functions of the string.

In doing so we may come to the conclusion and see the waxed string as being able to be used to tie the two rings together. Given the effectiveness of this approach, it is implicated that one way we may promote Divergent Thinking is through teaching students to consider: "whether the object may be broken down further" [60] and "whether the description of the part imply a use" in doing so we may teach students to break down objects to their purest form and make salient the obscure features of a problem. This connects to the previously discussed idea of conceptualization where problem solving effectiveness can be increased through focusing time on defining the problem rather than jumping to conclusions based on our own preconceptions.

In the following section we will discuss what strategies experts use when solving problems. Many researchers view effective problem solving as being dependent on two important variables: the amount of experience we have in trying to solve a particular category of problems [61] , which we addressed earlier by demonstrating that in practicing problem solving through engaging in a problem-based approach we may increase problem solving skills.

However, the second factor to consider is the amount of domain-specific knowledge that we have to draw upon [61]. Experts possess a vast amount of domain knowledge, which allows them to efficiently apply their knowledge to relevant problems. Experts have a well-organized knowledge of their domain, which impacts they notice and how they arrange, represent and interpret information, this in turn enables them to better recall, reason and solve problems in comparison to novices.

In comparing experts to novices in their problem strategies, experts are able to organize their knowledge around the deep structure in important ideas or concepts in their domain, such as what kind of solution strategy is required to solve the problem [63]. In contrast novices group problems based on surface structure of the problems, such as the objects that appear in the problem. Experts also spend more time than novices analyzing and identifying problems at the beginning of the problem-solving process.

Experts take more time in thinking and planning before implementing solutions and use a limited set of strategies that are optimal in allowing them to richer and more effective solutions to the given problem. In addition experts will engage in deeper and more complete problem representation novices, in using external representations such as sketches and diagrams to represent information and solve problems.

In doing so they are able to solve problems quicker and come up with better solutions. Given the literature above it is evident that problem solving and expertise overlap as the key strategies that experts utilize are also provided as effective problem solving strategies. Therefore, we may conclude that experts not only have a vast knowledge of their domain, they also know and implement the most effective strategies in order to solve problem more efficiently and effectively in comparison to novices.

Cognitive Tutor is a kind of Intelligent Tutoring Systems. In , Anderson, Boyle, and Reigser added the discipline of cognitive psychology to the Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Since then, the intelligent tutoring system adopted this approach to construct cognitive models for students to gain knowledge was named Cognitive Tutors.

Cognitive Tutors support the idea of learning by doing, an important part of human tutoring, which to provide students the performance opportunities to apply the objective skills or concepts and content related feedback. Cognitive Tutors can be created and applied to different curriculum or domains to help students learn, as well as being integrated into classroom learning as adaptive software. The curriculum and domains include mathematics in middle school and high school, [66] [68] [70] genetics in post-secondary institutions, [71] and programming.

Cognitive Tutors yielded huge impacts on the classroom, student motivation, and student achievement. The theoretical background of Cognitive Tutors is ACT-R theory of learning and performance, which distinguishes between procedural knowledge and declarative knowledge. The only way to acquire procedural knowledge is learning by doing. Production rules characterize how students, whether they beginning learners or advanced learners, think in a domain or subject.

Cognitive model is constructed on both ACT-R theory and empirical studies of learners. Since there are various methods of each task, students can choose their way of solving problems. Students can ask for advice or hint any time when solving problems. According to Corbett, [68] there are three levels of advice. The first level is to accomplish a particular goal; the second level is to offer general ideas of achieving the goal, and the third level is to give students detailed advice on how to solve the problem in the current context.

Knowledge tracing can monitor the growing number of production rules during the problem solving process. Every student can choose one production rule every step of his or her way of solving problems, and Cognitive Tutors can calculate an updated estimate of the probability of the student has learned the particular rule. In geometry learning, it could happen when students have over-generalized production rules in their prior knowledge, and thus leading shallow encoding and learning.

For instance, a student may choose the correct answer and go to next step base on the over-generalized production rule, if an angle looks equal to another, then it is , instead of real understanding. Also, the form of explanation in the new version is different from speech-based explanations mentioned in another experiment on self-explanation. Thus, the students were able to transfer those learned rules to new situations better, avoiding shallow encoding and learning. Corbett et al. The findings suggested the effectiveness of implementing Genetics Cognitive Tutor in post-secondary institution genetic problem-solving practice settings.

In the first evaluation, the participants used the Genetics Cognitive Tutor with their class activities or homework assignments. The software has 16 modules with about problems in five general genetic topics. Genetics Cognitive Tutor utilized the cognitive model of genetics problem solving knowledge to provide step-by-step help, and both model tracing and knowledge tracing.

The finding suggested that the algorithm of knowledge tracing is capable of accurately estimating every student performance on the paper- and-pencil post-test. Project Based Learning is a concept that is meant to place the student at the center of learning. The learner is expected to take on an active role in their learning by responding to a complex challenge or question through an extended period of investigation. Project Based Learning is meant for students to acknowledge the curriculum of their class, but also access the knowledge that they already have to solve the problem challenge.

At its roots, project-based learning is an activity in which students develop an understanding of a topic based on a real-life problem or issue and requires learners to have a degree of responsibility in designing their learning activity [82]. Blummenfeld et al. Project based learning is based on five criteria [84].

Critical Thinking Mindset Self-Rating…

Challenges are based on authentic, real-world problems that require learners to engage through an inquiry process and demonstrate understanding through active or experiential learning. An example would be elementary or secondary students being asked by their teacher to solve a school problem — such as how to deal with cafeteria compost. Students would be encouraged to work in groups to develop solutions for this problem within specific criteria for research, construction, and demonstration of their idea as learners are cognitively engaged with subject matter over an extended period of time keeping them motivated [83].

The result is complex learning that defines its success is more than as more than the sum of the parts [85]. Project Based Learning aims at learners coordinating skills of knowledge, collaboration, and a final project presentation. This type of schema construction allows learners to use concrete training to perform concrete results. The learner uses previous knowledge to connect with new information and elaborate on their revised perception of a topic [85]. In Project Based Learning this would constitute the process of information gathering and discussing this information within a team to decide on a final solution for the group-instructed problem.

Unlike Problem-Based Learning, experiential learning within a constructivist pedagogy, is the basis of Project Based Learning, and learners show their knowledge, or lack there of, by working towards a real solution through trial and error on a specific driving question. The philosophy of Experiential experiential learning education comes from the theories developed by John Dewey in his work Education and Experience. Dewey argues that experience is shown to be a continuous process of learning by arousing curiosity, strengthen initiative, and is a force in moving the learner towards further knowledge [86].

Learners must make up the expected gap in their knowledge through research and working together in a collaborative group. The experiential learning through Project Based Learning is focused on a driving question usually presented by the teacher. It is this focus that students must respond to with a designed artifact to show acquired knowledge. The constructivist methodology of Project Based Learning is invoked through the guided discovery process set forth by the instructor, unlike pure discovery which has been criticised for student having too much freedom [87] , Project Based Learning involves a specific question driven by the instructor to focus the process of investigation.

This form of constructivist pedagogy has shown to promote cognitive processing that is most effective in this type of learning environment [87]. Project Based Learning provides a platform for learners to find their own solutions to the teacher driven question, but also have a system in which to discover, analyze, and present. Therefore, Project Based Learning delivers beneficial cognitive meaningful learning by selecting, organizing, and integrating knowledge [87]. Project Based Learning is a branch of education theory that is based on the idea of learning through doing.

John Dewey indicated that teachers and schools should help learners to achieve greater depth in correlation between theory and real-world through experiential and constructivist methods. Dewey stated that education should contain an experiential continuum and a democratization of education to promote a better quality of human experience [86]. These two elements are consistent with Project Based Learning through the application of authentic, real world problems and production of artifacts as solutions, and the learner finding their own solutions through a collaborative effort with in a group.

Blumenfeld et al. Project Based Learning has basis also in the work of Jean Piaget who surmised that the learner is best served to learn in a constructivist manner — using previous knowledge as a foundation for new learning and connections. Piaget believed in the learner discovering new knowledge for themselves, but that without collaboration the individual would not be able to coherently organize their solution [87]. Project Based Learning is perceived as beneficial to learners in various ways including gained knowledge, communication, and creativity.

While engaging on a single challenge, learners obtain a greater depth of knowledge. Moreover, abilities in communication, leadership, and inter-social skills are strengthened due to the collaborative nature of Project Based Learning. Students retain content longer and have a better understanding of what they are learning. There are at least four strands of cognitive research to support Project Based Learning [84] — motivation, expertise, contextual factors, and technology. Motivation of students that is centred on the learning and mastery of subject matter are more inclined to have sustained engagement with their work [89].

Therefore, Project Based Learning discourages public competition in favour of cooperative goals to reduce the threat to individual students and increase focus on learning and mastery [84]. Project Based Learning is designed to allow students to reach goals together, without fear of reprisal or individual criticism.

For instance, Helle, et al. Students were given questionnaires about their experience during this assignment to determine their motivation level. Helle, et al. Further, the study implied intrinsic motivation increase substantially for those who were lowest in self-regulation [90]. Learner metacognitive and self-regulation skills are lacking in many students and these are important to master in student development in domains [84].

In the Project Based Learning system the relationship between student and teacher allows the instructor to use scaffolding to introduce more advance forms of inquiry for students to model, thus middle school students and older are very capable of meaningful learning and sophisticated results [91].

Learners would then become experts over time of additional skills sets that they developed on their own within this system. Contextually, situated cognition is best realized when the material to be used resembles real-life as much as possible [84] , therefore, Project Based Learning provides confidence in learners to succeed in similar tasks outside of school because they no longer associate subjects as artificial boundaries to knowledge transfer.

Gorges and Goke investigated the relationship between student perception of their abilities in major high school subjects and their relating these skills to real-world problem application through an online survey. Learners showed confidence in problem-solving skills and how to apply their learning to real-life situations, as Gorges and Goke [92] report, and that students who used Project Based Learning style learning have increased self-efficacy and self-concepts of ability in math SD.

Therefore, students are more likely to use domain-specific knowledge outside of an academic setting through increased confidence. Further, a comparison between students immediately after finishing a course and 12 weeks to 2 years provided effect sizes that showed Project Based Learning helped retain much knowledge [92]. Technology use allows learners to have a more authentic experience by providing users with an environment that includes data, expanded interaction and collaboration, and emulates the use of artifacts [84].

The learner, in accessing technology, can enhance the benefits of Project Based Learning by having more autonomy is finding knowledge and connecting with group members. Creativity is enhanced as students must find innovative solutions to their authentic problem challenges. For instance, using digital-story-telling techniques through Project Based Learning, as stated by Hung and Hwang [93] , to collect data photos in elementary class to help answer a specific project question on global warming in science provided a significant increase in tests results SD 0.

As well, in order to find answers, learners must access a broad range of knowledge, usually crossing over various disciplines. The end result is that projects are resolved by student groups that use their knowledge and access to additional knowledge usually through technology to build a solution to the specific problem. One of the main arguments against this type of learning is that the project can become unfocused and not have the appropriate amount of classroom time to build solutions.

Educators themselves marginalized Project Based Learning because they lack the training and background knowledge in its implementation. Further financial constraints to provide effective evaluation through technology dissuades teachers as well [94]. The information gained by students could be provided in a lecture-style instruction and can be just as effective according to critics. Further, the danger is in learners becoming off-task in their time spent in the classroom, and if they are not continually focused on the task and the learning content, then the project will not be successful.

Educators with traditional backgrounds in teaching find Project Based Learning requires instructors to maintain student connection to content and management of their time — this is not necessarily a style that all teachers can accomplish [94]. Project Based Learning is applicable to a number of different disciplines since it has various applications in learning, and is specifically relevant with the 21st century redefinition of education differentiated, technologically-focused, collaboration, cross-curricular.

STEM Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics is one form of 21st century education that benefits from instructors using Project Based Learning since it natural bridges between domains. The focus of STEM is to prepare secondary students for the rigors of post-secondary education and being able to solve complex problems in teams as would be expected when performing these jobs in the real world after graduation.

Many potential occupational areas could benefit from Project Based Learning including medical, engineering, computer design, and education. Project Based Learning allows secondary students the opportunity to broaden their knowledge and become successful in high-stakes situation [95]. Moreover, these same students then develop a depth in knowledge when it comes to reflecting upon their strengths and limitations [95].

The result would be a learner who has developed critical thinking and has had a chance to apply it to real situations. Further the construction of a finished product is a realistic expectation in presenting an authentic result from learning. The product result demands accountability, and learner adherent to instructor expectations as well as constraints for the project [95]. The learner is disciplined to focus on specific outcomes, understand the parameters of the task, and demonstrate a viable artifact.

The implication is that students will be ready to meet the challenges of a high-technology, fast-paced work world where innovation, collaboration, and results-driven product is essential for success. Technology is one area where Project Based Learning can be applied by developing skills in real-world application, thus cognitive tools aforded by new technology will be useful if perceived as essential for the project as is the case in many real-world applications [83]..

Critical Thinking Disposition Self-rating Form

For example, designers of computer systems with prior knowledge may be able to know how to trouble-shoot an operating system, but they do not really understand how things fit or work together, and they have a false sense of security about their skills [96]. Design Thinking is a pedagogical approach to teaching through a constructionist methodology of challenge-based problem solving branching off of Project Based learning. It should be understood as a combination of sub-disciplines having design as the subject of their cognitive interests [97].

An example of design-thinking would be learners engaged with finding a solution to a real-world problem. However, unlike Project Based Learning, design-thinking asks the learner to create a practical solution within a scaffolding process Figure 3 such as finding a method to deliver clean drinking water to a village. Designers would consider social, economic, and political considerations, but would deliver a final presentation of a working prototype that could be marketable.

Hence a water system could be produced to deliver water to villagers, but within the limits of the materials, finances, and local policies in mind. It designates cores principles of empathy, define, ideate, prototype, and test to fulfill the challenges of design. Starting with a goal solution in mind, empathise is placed upon creative and practical decision making through design to achieve an improved future result.

It draws upon a thinking that requires investigation into the details of a problem to find hidden parameters for a solution-based result. The achieved goal then becomes the launching point for further goal-setting and problem solving. This type of approach to education is based on the premise that the modern world is full of artificial constructs, and that our civilization historically has relied upon these artifacts to further our progress in technological advances. Herbert Simon, a founder of design-thinking, states that the world that students find themselves in today is much more man-made and artificial that it is a natural world [98].

The challenge of design-thinking is to foster innovation by enhancing student creative thinking abilities [99]. Design-thinking is a tool for scaffolding conventional educational projects into Project Based thinking. Van Merrienbroer views design-learning as a scaffolding for whole-task practice.

It decreases intrinsic cognitive load while learners can practice on the simplest of worked-out examples [87]. Therefore, Design-thinking is currently becoming popular due to its ability to bridge between the justification of what the learner knows and what the learner discovers within the context of 21st century skills and learning. A further example of this process is the design of a product that children will use to increase their physical activity see video on Design Thinking and can be explained using the scaffold of Design Thinking:.

Simon published his findings on the gap he found in education of professions in He observed that techniques in the natural sciences and that just as science strove to show simplicity in the natural world of underlying complex systems, and Simon determined the it was the same for the artificial world as well []. Not only should this include the process behind the sciences, but the arts and humanities as well since music, for example involves formal patterns like mathematics Simon, Hence, the creative designs of everyone is based upon a common language and its application.

While Schon builds upon the empathetic characteristics of design-thinking as a Ford Professor of Urban Planning and Education at MIT, referring to this process as an artistic and intuitive process for problem-solving []. Schon realized that part of the design process was also the reflection-in-action that must be involved during critical thinking and ideating. Cross fuses these earlier ideas into a pedagogy surrounding education stating that design-thinking should be part of the general education of both sciences and humanities [97].

He implies that students encouraged to use this style of thinking will improve cognitive development of non-verbal thought and communication [97]. Design-thinking follows a specific flow from theoretical to practical. It relies upon guided learning to promote effective learner solutions and goes beyond inquiry which has been argued does not work because it goes beyond the limits of long-term memory [97]. Design-thinking requires the learner to have a meta-analysis of their process. Creativity innovative thought is evident in design thinking through studies in defocused and focused attention to stimuli in memory activation [97].

Hu et al. The results show that these students had increased thinking ability SD. This shows use of divergent and convergent thinking in the creative process, and both of these process of thought has been noted to be important in the process of creativity Goldschmidt, , p 2 and demonstrates the Higher Order Thinking that is associated with long-term memory. Design-thinking specifically demonstrates the capability of having learners develop. Design-thinking critics comment that design is in itself not a science or cognitive method of learning, and is a non-scientific activity due to the use of intuitive processes [97].

The learner is not truly involved within a cognitive practice scientific process of reasoning. However, the belief of Cross is that design itself is a science to be studied, hence it can be investigated with systematic and reliable methods of investigation [97]. Further, Schon states that there is connection between theory and practice that in design thinking means that there is a loyalty to developing a theoretical idea into a real world prototype [].

Design-thinking is a process of scientific cognitive practice that does constitute technical rationality [] and using this practice to understand the limits of their design that includes a reflective practice and meta. Further, this pedagogy is the application for the natural gap between theory and practice for most ideas, by allowing the learner to step beyond normal instruction and practice to try something new and innovative to come up with a solution.

Design-thinking rejects heuristically-derived responses based on client or expert appreciation to take on an unforeseen form []. Design-thinking is exceptionally positioned for use with 21st century skills based around technological literacy. Specifically, it is meant to assist the learner in developing creative and critical skills towards the application of technology. Designing is a distinct form of thinking that creates a qualitative relationship to satisfy a purpose []. The designer needs to be able to think outside the perceived acceptable solution and look to use current technology.

Therefore, learners using design thinking are approaching all forms of technology as potential applications for a solution. Prototyping might include not just a hardware application, but also the use of software. Cutting-edge technologies such as Augmented Reality and Virtual Reality would be acceptable forms of solutions for design challenges. Specific application of design-thinking is, therefore applicable to areas of study that require technological adaptation and innovation.

Specifically, the K BC new curriculum has a specific focus on Applied Design, Skills, and Technologies that calls for all students to have knowledge of design-thinking throughout their entire education career and its application towards the advancement of technology. Therefore, Design Thinking is a relative and essential component to engaging student critical thought process.

Argumentation is the process of assembling and communicating reasons for or against an idea, that is, the act of making and presenting arguments. CT in addition to clear communication makes a good argument. It is the process through which one rationally solves problems, issues and disputes as well as resolving questions [].

Additional information

The practice of argumentation consists of two dimensions: dialogue and structure []. The dialogue in argumentative discussions focus on specific speech acts — actions done through language i. The structure of an argument helps distinguish the different perspectives in discussion and highlight positions for which speakers are arguing [].

Further financial constraints to provide effective evaluation through technology dissuades teachers as well Efstratia, , p Educators with traditional backgrounds in teaching find Project Based Learning requires instructors to maintain student connection to content and management of their time — this is not necessarily a style that all teachers can accomplish Efstratia, , p Project Based Learning allows secondary students the opportunity to broaden their knowledge and become successful in high-stakes situation Capraro, et al.

Moreover, these same students then develop a depth in knowledge when it comes to reflecting upon their strengths and limitations Capraro, et al. The product result demands accountability, and learner adherent to instructor expectations as well as constraints for the project Capraro, et al. Technology is one area where Project Based Learning can be applied by developing skills in real-world application. For example, designers of computer systems with prior knowledge may be able to know how to trouble-shoot an operating system, but they do not really understand how things fit or work together, and they have a false sense of security about their skills Gary, , p 1.

It relies upon guided learning to promote effective learner solutions and goes beyond inquiry which has been argued does not work because it goes beyond the limits of long-term memory Lazonder and Harmsen, , p 2. Creativity innovative thought is evident in design thinking through studies in defocused and focused attention to stimuli in memory activation Goldschmidt, , p 1. The psychological process of argumentation that allows one the produce, analyze and evaluate arguments [].

These stages will be discussed in more detail later in this chapter. Argumentation does not only impact the development of CT and vice versa, it affects many other aspects of learning as well. For instance, a study conducted in a junior high school science class showed that when students engaged in argumentation, they drew heavily on their prior knowledge and experiences [].

Not only did argumentation enable the students to use their prior knowledge, it also helped them consolidate knowledge and elaborate on their understanding of the subject at a higher level []. These are just a few of the ways in which argumentation can be seen to impact aspects of learning other than the development of CT.

Argumentation and CT appear to have a close relationship in instruction. Many studies have shown the impact that both of these elements can have on one another. Data suggests that when CT is infused into instruction it impacts the ability of students to argue [] tasks that involve both critical thinking and creative thinking must be of an argumentative nature [] , and that argument analysis and storytelling can improve CT [].

In other words it would appear that both CT and argumentation impact the development of each other in students and that both impact other aspects of learning and cognition. CT facilitates the evaluation of the information necessary to make an argument. It aids in the judgement of the validity of each position. It is used to assess the credibility of sources and helps in approaching the issue from multiple points of view. The elements of CT and argumentation have many common features. For example, examining evidence and counter-evidence of a statement and the information that backs up these claims are both facets of creating a sound argument and thinking critically.

First, there needs to be an examination of the aspects of CT and how they can be impacted by argumentation. The first component, knowledge, as stated by Bruning et. Therefore, it is essential that students have a solid foundation of knowledge of whatever it is that they are arguing. The ability to use well founded information in order to effectively analyze the credibility of new information is imperative for students who wish to increase their argumentative abilities.

The second component of CT that is important for argumentation is inference. In other words, the ability to reach conclusions from known information is pivotal in developing and elaborating an argument. As well, the use of induction , a part of the CT process, is important to argumentation. As Bruning et al. Moreover, making inductions of general conclusions using the complete information that every member of the group can provide shows how interaction can be helpful through the use of induction in argumentation []. Therefore, it can be seen how induction, an important part of CT, can have a significant impact on argumentation and collaboration.

The final component of CT, that may be the most important in its relationship to argumentation, is evaluation. The components of Evaluation indicated by Bruning et al. These are three essential aspects of creating a successful argument []. Hornikx and Hahn provide a framework for three key elements of argumentation that are heavily attached in these Bruning et al. The three aspects of argumentation that Hornikx and Hahn focus on in their research is the production , analysis and evaluation of arguments [].

Producing an argument uses the key aspects of CT; there must be evaluation, analysis, judgement and weighing of the argument that one wishes to make a stand on. Analysis of arguments and analysis in CT go hand in hand, there must be a critical analysis of information and viewpoints in order to create a successful and fully supported argument. As well, evaluation is used similarly in argumentation as it is derived from CT.

Assessing the credibility of sources and information is an essential part in finding articles and papers that can assist someone in making an informed decision. The final aspect of evaluation in critical thinking is metacognition, thinking about thinking or monitoring one's own thoughts []. Monitoring one's own thoughts and taking time to understand the rationality of the decisions that one makes is also a significant part of argumentation.

According to Pinto et al. It can clearly be seen through the research presented that argumentation is heavily influenced by CT skills, such as knowledge, inference, evaluation and metacognition. However there are also strong implications that instruction of CT in a curriculum can bolster argumentation. A study conducted by Bensley et. There can be many arguments made for the implication of specific CT skills to impact argumentation, but this research shows that explicit teaching of CT in general can increase the ability of students to more effectively analyze arguments as well.

This should be taken into account that Skills Programs mentioned later in this chapter should be instituted if teachers wish to foster argumentation as well as CT in the classroom.

Article Tools

Since the publication of the California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory ( CCTDI)2 our . The “Critical Thinking Mindset Self-Rating Form” on the next page. Facione, PA, “Critical Thinking: What It is and Why It Counts” . asked to try to form a consensus about the meaning of critical . including cognitive skills and dispositions. As to the evaluation, inference, explanation, and self- regulation.

Argumentation is a part of the CT process, it clarifies reasoning and the increases one's ability to assess viable information. It is a part of metacognition in the sense that one needs to evaluate their own ideas. Research by Glassner and Schwarz shows that argumentation lies at the intersection of critical and creative thinking. They argue that reasoning, which is both critical and creative, is done through argumentation in adolescents.

They suggest that reasoning is constantly being influenced by other perspectives and information. The ability to think creatively as well as critically about new information is managed by argumentation []. The back and forth process of accommodating, evaluating, and being open minded to new information can be argued as critical and creative thinking working together. However, the way in which one reaches conclusions from information is created from the ability to weigh this information, and then to successfully draw a conclusion regarding the validity of the solution that students come to.

There is also a clear correlation of how argumentation helps students to nurture CT skills as well. It is clear that CT can directly impact argumentation, but this relationship can also be seen as bidirectional, with argumentation instruction developing the CT skills. A study by Gold et al. This research suggests that argumentation and argument analysis are not only be beneficial to students, but also to older adults.

This study was conducted using mature adult managers as participants.

  • danny poet welsh playwright essayist novelist!
  • double space common app essay!
  • self magazine personal essays.
  • Critical Thinking Disposition Self-Rating Form?

The article outlines four skills of CT that can be impacted by the use of argument analysis and storytelling: critique of rhetoric, tradition, authority, and knowledge. These four skills of CT are somewhat deeper than many instructed in high schools and extremely important to develop. The ability of argumentation to impact CT in a way that enables a person to gain a better perspective on their view about these things is essential to developing personal values as well as being able to use argumentation and CT to critique those values when presented with new information.

The ability of argumentation to influence the ability of individuals to analyze their own traditions and knowledge is important for all students as it can give them better insight into what they value.


Argumentation is beneficial to CT skills as well as creative thinking skills in high school students. Research done by Demir and İsleyen shows that argumentation based a science learning approach in 9th graders improves both of types of thinking []. The ability of students to use argumentation to foster CT as well as creative thinking can be seen as being very beneficial, as mentioned earlier creative and CT skills use argumentation as a means of reasoning to draw conclusions, it is therefore not surprising that argumentation in instruction also fosters both of these abilities.

In summation, it can clearly be seen that there is a link between both argumentation and CT along with many skills in the subset of CT skills. Explicit instruction of both of these concepts seems to foster the growth of the other and can be seen as complementary. In the next sections of this chapter how these aspects can be beneficial if taught within the curriculum and how they go hand in hand in fostering sound reasoning as well as skills that will help students throughout their lives will be examined.

An effective method for structuring the instruction of CT is to organize the thinking skills into a clear and sequential steps. The order in which these steps aid in guiding the student towards internalizing those steps in order to apply them in their daily lives. By taking a deductive approach, starting from broader skills and narrowing them down to task-specific skills helps the student begin from what they know and generate something that they hadn't known before through CT.

In the spirit of CT, a student's awareness of their own skills also plays an important role in their learning. In the classroom, they should be encouraged to reflect upon the process through which they completed a goal rather than just the result. Through the encouragement of reflection, students can become more aware of the necessary thinking skills necessary for tasks, such as Argumentation.

In designing a plan to teach CT, one must be able to critically evaluate and assess different methods and make an informed decision on which would work best for one's class. There are a variety of approaches towards instructing CT. Descriptive Models consist of explanations of how "good" thinking occurs. Specifically, it focuses on thinking strategies such as heuristics to assess information and how to make decisions. Prescriptive Models consist of explanations of what good thinking should be.

In a sense, these models give a prototype, a "prescription", of what good thinking is. This approach is comparatively less applicable and sets a high standard of what is expected of higher order thinking. In addition to evaluating which approach would work best for them, prior to teaching CT, instructors need to carefully select the specific types of CT skills that they want students to learn. This process involves assessing factors such as age range, performance level as well as cognitive ability of one's class in order to create a program that can benefit most of, if not all, the students.

A final aspect of instruction to consider as an educator is whether direct or indirect instruction will be used to teach CT. Direct Instruction refers to the explicit teaching of CT skills that emphasizes rules and steps for thinking. This is most effective when solutions to problems are limited or when the cognitive task is easy. In contrast, Indirect Instruction refers to a learner-oriented type of teaching that focuses on the student building their own understanding of thinking.

This is most effective when problems are ambiguous, unclear or open to interpretation such as moral or ethical decisions []. One example of indirect CT instruction is through the process of writing literature reviews. According to Chandler and Dedman, having the skills to collect, assess and write literature reviews as well as summarize results of studies requires CT.

Specifically, they assert that practical writing assignments, such as creating literature reviews, help students combine revision and reflection while expanding their thinking to evaluate multiple perspectives on a topic.

Study Skills Workshop 05 - Critical Thinking Skills

They found that upon reframing the assignment as a tool to facilitate students in becoming critical reviewers, students viewed the literature review as a summation of course material in addition to an opportunity to improve critical reading and writing skills. Through questioning during discussions, students were guided to analyze the authority and credibility of their articles. The students actively sought for more evidence to support articles on their topics. They found that students successfully created well synthesized literature reviews at the end of the BSW program [].

This program used implicit instruction of CT skills through dialogue between instructor and students as well as peer engagement. Instead of explicitly stating specific skills or steps to learn CT, the instructors lead the students to practice CT through an assignment. As students worked on the assignment, they needed to use reasoning, analysis and inferential skills in order to synthesize and draw conclusions around the evidence they found on their topics.

Practical application of CT skills through an assignment helped students develop CT through indirect instruction. Argument mapping is a way to visualize argumentation. These programs aid in the formulation of critical thinking skills through alternative methods of instruction such as problem-solving. They are usually targeted towards special populations such as students with learning disabilities or cognitive deficits. The Thinking Materials are geared towards the improvement of thinking skills. This skills program takes on a Gestalt approach and emphasizes the perceptual factor of problem solving.

It usually spans over the course of 2 years and is suitable for a wide age range of children. The lessons strive to develop creative thinking, problem-solving as well as interpersonal skills. The materials are split into 6 units and cover topics such as planning, analyzing, comparing, selecting, evaluating and generating alternatives.

A typical unit has leaflets covering a single topic, followed by examples using practice items. The leaflets are usually effective in group settings. The focus of these units are to practice thinking skills, therefore much of the instructional time is spent on practicing the topics brought up in the leaflets []. Much of the empirical research on this stand-alone program revolves around the development of creative thinking, however, it is relatively more extensive in comparison to the other programs mentioned in this chapter.

A Systematic Review of Critical Thinking Instruments for Use in Dental Education

The CoRT program has been shown to improve creativity in gifted students. The students were given a pretest that evaluated the fluency, flexibility and originality in writing creative short stories []. The posttest followed the same parameters as the pretest and the results were analyzed by comparing pre and posttest scores.

The mean scores of the experimental groups in all three elements were higher than the control group []. These findings suggest that the CoRT program aids gifted students in creative writing skills as indicated through the use of rhetorical devices metaphor, analogy, etc. The flexibility and fluency of writing is also applicable to the practice of argumentation and CT. In developing the ability to articulate and modify ideas, students can transfer these skills from creative writing towards higher-order cognitive processes such as CT and argumentation.

The FIE is a specialized program focused on mediated learning experiences that strives to develop critical thinking and problem solving skills. Mediation is learning through interaction between the student and the mediator. Similar to Vygotsky's scaffolding, mediation is student-oriented and hinges upon 4 parameters: Intentionality, Reciprocity, Transcendence and Meaning.

Reciprocity involves the student-oriented mentality of mediation, the response of the student hold most importance over academic results. Transcendence focuses on the connectivity of the mediation, it encourages the formation of associations and applications that stretch beyond the scope of the immediate material. Lastly, Meaning in mediation is where the student and mediator explicitly identify "why" and "what for" which promotes dialogue between the two during mediation.

The "instruments" used to facilitate instruction are a series of paper and pencil exercises geared towards practicing internalizing higher order thinking strategies. The instruments cover domains such as analytic perception, spatial organization, categorization, comparison and many more. The implementation of this program varies across countries and is also dependent on the targeted population. A typical program contains 14 units with sessions for a few hours every week administered by trained IE staff and teachers.

The Productive Thinking Program consists of the development of planning skills, generating and checking hypotheses as well as creating new ideas. This program is designed as a set of 15 lessons aimed at being completed over one semester. The target population of the program is upper-level elementary school students. The lessons are administered through the use of narrative booklets, often taking a detective-like approach to problem solving where the student is the detective solving a mystery.

A structured sequence of steps guides the student to attain an objective specific to the lesson at hand. First, I dentify the problem, the solver needs to find out what the problem is. Second, D efine the problem involves having a clear picture of the entire problem before trying to solve it. Third, E xplore the alternatives, meaning that the solver needs to assess the potential solutions available.

Fourth, A cting on a plan, that is, applying the solution and doing the act of solving. Lastly, L ooking at the effects which encompasses the evaluation of the consequences of the chosen solution. IDEAL is flexible in that it can be adapted to suit a wide age range and different levels of ability in its application. It can also be applied to different domains such as composition or physics. Research on argumentation is a comparatively new field of study for education, but has been noted to be of significant importance to almost all educational settings.

Download Limit Exceeded

Grade schools, high schools, and colleges now emphasize the use of argumentation in the classroom as it is seen as the best way for communication and debate in a both vocational and educational settings around the world. The activities employed such as peer collaboration, using computers, reflection activities, individual essays, and small group work all have implications for being valuable in teaching argumentation although it is not clear which ones are the most effective.

This shows that even students with seemingly no argumentative skills can be instructed to become as skilled or more skilled than their peers who tested higher than them at the beginning of the study. Research by Crowell and Kuhn highlights collaborative dialogical activities as practical interventions in the development of argumentative skills.

The researchers implemented a longitudinal argumentative intervention that used topic cycles to structure a middle school philosophy class []. The students had class twice a week for 50 minutes each class over the span of three years. Then individuals from either side argue with an opponent through an electronic medium. Finally, the students engage in a whole class debate. These three stages were termed Pregame, Game and Endgame, respectively.

After the intervention, students were required to write individual essays regarding the topic through which their argumentative skills would be assessed []. The results showed an increased in the generation of dual perspective arguments in the intervention group. This type of argument reflects a higher-order reasoning that requires critical assessment of multiple perspectives.

These results did not begin to appear until year two and was only found statistically significant in year three suggesting that argumentative skills have a longer development trajectory than other lower-level cognitive skills []. Through this stand-alone intervention, the collaborative aspect of dialogical activities facilitates the development of intellectual dispositions necessary for good argumentation []. Further research suggests that teaching through the use of collaborative discussions and argumentative dialogue is an effective teaching strategy [].

Through argumentation, students can acquire knowledge of concepts as well as the foundational ideas behind these concepts. In formulating arguments, students need to generate premises that provide structure to an argument through accepted definitions or claims. Argumentation helps students reveal and clarify misconceptions as well as elaborate on background knowledge. Participants included university students. Internal consistencies for the total WGCTA-FS among students majoring in psychology, educational psychology, and special education, including undergraduates and graduates, ranged from.

Form X is for students in grades Form Z is for advanced and gifted high school students, undergraduate and graduate students, and adults. Reliability estimates for Form Z range from. Measures of validity were computed in standard conditions, roughly defined as conditions that do not adversely affect test performance. Correlations between Level Z and other measures of critical thinking are about. When faculty focus on critical thinking in planning curriculum development, modest cross-sectional and longitudinal gains have been demonstrated in students' CTS.

The recommended cut-off score for each scale is 40, the suggested target score is 50, and the maximum score is Scores below 40 on a specific scale are weak in that CT disposition, and scores above 50 on a scale are strong in that dispositional aspect. An overall score of shows serious deficiency in disposition toward CT, while an overall score of while rare shows across the board strength. The seven subscales are analyticity, self-confidence, inquisitiveness, maturity, open-mindedness, systematicity, and truth seeking Studies have shown the California Critical Thinking Skills Test captured gain scores in students' critical thinking over one quarter or one semester.

Multiple health science programs have demonstrated significant gains in students' critical thinking using site-specific curriculum. Studies conducted to control for re-test bias showed no testing effect from pre- to post-test means using two independent groups of CT students. Since behavioral science measures can be impacted by social-desirability bias-the participant's desire to answer in ways that would please the researcher-researchers are urged to have participants take the Marlowe Crowne Social Desirability Scale simultaneously when measuring pre- and post-test changes in critical thinking skills.

Depending on the testing, context KR alphas range from. This test measures health science undergraduate and graduate students' CTS. Although test items are set in health sciences and clinical practice contexts, test takers are not required to have discipline-specific health sciences knowledge. For this reason, the test may have limited utility in dental education Preliminary estimates of internal consistency show that overall KR coefficients range from. The low K coefficients may be result of small sample size, variance in item response, or both see following table.

Table 8. The scale consists of two sets of descriptors. The first set relates primarily to the attitudinal habits of mind dimension of CT. The second set relates primarily to CTS. A single rater should know the student well enough to respond to at least 17 or the 20 descriptors with confidence. If not, the validity of the ratings may be questionable. If a single rater is used and ratings over time show some consistency, comparisons between ratings may be used to assess changes. If more than one rater is used, then inter-rater reliability must be established among the raters to yield meaningful results.

While the PJRF can be used to assess the effectiveness of training programs for individuals or groups, the evaluation of participants' actual skills are best measured by an objective tool such as the California Critical Thinking Skills Test. Course evaluations typically ask for responses of "agree" or "disagree" to items focusing on teacher behavior.

Typically the questions do not solicit information about student learning. Because contemporary thinking about curriculum is interested in student learning, this form was developed to address differences in pedagogy and subject matter, learning outcomes, student demographics, and course level characteristic of education today. This form also grew out of a "one size fits all" approach to teaching evaluations and a recognition of the limitations of this practice.

It offers information about how a particular course enhances student knowledge, sensitivities, and dispositions. The form gives students an opportunity to provide feedback that can be used to improve instruction.

This assessment tool uses a four-point classification schema that lists particular opposing reasoning skills for select criteria. One advantage of a rubric is that it offers clearly delineated components and scales for evaluating outcomes.

This rubric explains how students' CTS will be evaluated, and it provides a consistent framework for the professor as evaluator. Users can add or delete any of the statements to reflect their institution's effort to measure CT.